Abortion debate thread

J C · 27-05-2013 10:16PM

HurtLocker wrote: »

It didnt happen here. The public doesn't care, you hardly expect the media to push it much. It's not our health service not even close. Irish people focus on whats happened here.

Hear no evil ... see no evil ...

... so 'it didn't happen here' is a good reason to not report it ... the ultimate in insular introspection ...
... I wonder why??!!!

... and the Irish public doeesn't care about a mass-murderer of children ... who operated in the best (most expensive anyway) Health System on Earth ... says who???

koth wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/us/us-abortion-doctor-found-guilty-of-murder-1.1392098

http://www.thejournal.ie/kermit-gosnell-verdict-907406-May2013/

http://www.independent.ie/world-news/americas/monster-doctor-gets-three-life-sentences-for-baby-murders-29270336.html

Thanks for the links Koth.
However, there are longer reports in Local Papers down the country about somebody up in court for a defective tail light on a car!!!

Delirium · 27-05-2013 10:23PM

J C wrote: »

There are longer reports down the country about somebody up in court for a defective tail light on a car!!!

Imagine that, Irish newpapers have more details about a legal case happening in Ireland when compared to details about a case in the US.

J C · 27-05-2013 10:32PM

koth wrote: »

Imagine that, Irish newpapers have more details about a legal case happening in Ireland when compared to details about a case in the US.

... so is the Irish media going 'shut up shop' and just run stories about the weather and other items of local interest, like how Mrs O'Flaherties prize duck got killed on the road in Ballygobackwards this morning!!!
Has all of their lofty pretensions really come to this???

Corkfeen · 27-05-2013 10:46PM

J C wrote: »

... so is the Irish media going 'shut up shop' and just run stories about the weather and other items of local interest, like how Mrs O'Flaherties prize duck got killed on the road in Ballygobackwards this morning!!!
Has all of their lofty pretensions really come to this???

It's not unique to Gosnell, plenty of major news stories of murders and other crimes in the US get minimal news coverage in Ireland.

J C · 27-05-2013 11:11PM

Corkfeen wrote: »

It's not unique to Gosnell, plenty of major news stories of murders and other crimes in the US get minimal news coverage in Ireland.

... so Mrs O'Flaherty's prize duck is where 'its at'!!!:)

HurtLocker · 27-05-2013 11:13PM

J C wrote: »

Hear no evil ... see no evil ...

... so 'it didn't happen here' is a good reason to not report it ... the ultimate in insular introspection ...
... I wonder why??!!!

... and the Irish public doeesn't care about a mass-murderer of children ... who operated freely for years in the best (most expensive anyway) Health System on Earth ... says who???

No it's not see no evil! It's private business media. They serve the public with stories that interest the public. Not pro-life LOOK AT THIS! THE BABYIESS!! More likely some debate on property tax.

They were ten bombs in Afghanistan today but I'd still rather read about a local court case on TV licences tbh. There wont be much reporting of the afgan bombing. I'd imagine a 2 car collision with no injuries in Kerry would get a bit more coverage here.

And yes your correct if a women has an abortion it's no ones business but her own. Or as you put it mass murder of children. The majority are in favour of abortion in one shape or another. A quarter want abortion for personal reasons. So yes mass murder is a bit ott.

J C · 27-05-2013 11:22PM

HurtLocker wrote: »

No it's not see no evil! It's private business media. They serve the public with stories that interest the public. Not pro-life LOOK AT THIS! THE BABYIESS!! More likely some debate on property tax.

... Tax is really 'rivetting stuff' allright!!!
I look forward to reading about tax, almost as much as I enjoy paying it!!!

HurtLocker wrote: »

They were ten bombs in Afghanistan today but I'd still rather read about a local court case on TV licences tbh.

One of us needs to get out more ... it's probably me!!!:)

HurtLocker wrote: »

And yes your correct if a women has an abortion it's no ones business but her own. Or as you put it mass murder of children. The majority are in favour of abortion in one shape or another. A quarter want abortion for personal reasons. So yes mass murder is a bit ott.

The mass murderer I was referring to was the Doctor who was convicted of the first degree murder of three born alive aborted babies by cutting their spines ... and is now serving life without parole for his crimes.

Fanny Cradock · 27-05-2013 11:35PM

HurtLocker wrote: »

It didnt happen here. The public doesn't care, you hardly expect the media to push it much. It's not our health service not even close. Irish people focus on whats happened here.

Yes, I think that there might be some truth to this. I might simply be that this was not considered newsworthy. For example, RTE didn't much report on the story of Ariel Castro.

However, the charge is that some major US networks and other US media sources largely ignored the case - at least initially. From what I've seen (and I've provided a number of links that support this claim) there did seem to be something of a conspicuous silence from certain quarters.

J C · 27-05-2013 11:41PM

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

Yes, I think that there might be some truth to this. I might simply be that this was not considered newsworthy. For example, RTE didn't much report on the story of Ariel Castro.

I was woken up one morning with the story as it was breaking on Radio ... and his 'ugly mug' was looking out at me from the TV when I returned from work that evening. Not wall to wall coverge ... but significant and sufficent coverage none-the-less.

HurtLocker · 27-05-2013 11:45PM

J C wrote: »

... Tax is really 'rivetting stuff' allright!!!

One of us needs to get out more ... it's probably me!!!:)

The mass murderer I was referring to was the Doctor who was convicted of the first degree murder of three born alive aborted babies by cutting their spines ... and is now serving life without parole for his crimes.

Okay if you're going to resort to personal digs at me and my character I'm done here

Ill admit I misread about the doctor part. I know the story I was talking about foreign abortion news in general and messed up a small but of my reply by not making it clearer.

It's hard to discuss something when a party decides to not look at the bigger points such as media reporting in Ireland and decides to knit pick at the mention of the word tax.

People read irish media for mainly irish stories period. If you've a problem with that go find a country who's media doesn't tend to focus on local issues. Ill admit tv licence was a bit dull. Lets change it to a local murder instead of gosnell. And let's change tax to marriage equality

there things people want to hear about.

JimiTime · 27-05-2013 11:50PM

koth wrote: »

Imagine that, Irish newpapers have more details about a legal case happening in Ireland when compared to details about a case in the US.

Unbelievable state of denial there Koth. Abortion is a huge topic in the country at the moment, and a case like this and the statements by Planned Parenthood etc has implications on the whole of the industry. This isn't just some average case, but an absolutely shocking and abhorrant story.

HurtLocker · 27-05-2013 11:53PM

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

Yes, I think that there might be some truth to this. I might simply be that this was not considered newsworthy. For example, RTE didn't much report on the story of Ariel Castro.

However, the charge is that some major US networks and other US media sources largely ignored the case - at least initially. From what I've seen (and I've provided a number of links that support this claim) there did seem to be something of a conspicuous silence from certain quarters.

Our new is dreary enough without Gosnell. The current fodder crisis has much more relevance the ordinary viewer and would net more discussion between the public and government.

Yes there is something wrong with how US media brushed this under the carpet. But it is of no relevance to the Irish public how the US media reports local story's to American listeners/viewers. Its something that americans if they have issues should query not us. We've enough on our plate!

J C · 27-05-2013 11:55PM

HurtLocker wrote: »

Okay if you're going to resort to personal digs at me and my character I'm done here

Ill admit I misread about the doctor part. I know the story I was talking about foreign abortion news in general and messed up a small but of my reply by not making it clearer.

It's hard to discuss something when a party decides to not look at the bigger points such as media reporting in Ireland and decides to knit pick at the mention of the word tax.

People read irish media for mainly irish stories period. If you've a problem with that go find a country who's media doesn't tend to focus on local issues. Ill admit tv licence was a bit dull. Lets change it to a local murder instead of gosnell. And let's change tax to marriage equality there things people want to hear about.

I didn't mean to be personal ... and the more I think about it, I really do need to get out more.:)
... but for now, I'll settle for bed!!!

I take your point that people tend to be local focussed ... but not exclusively so ... we are also interested in how the rest of the World lives ... and dies ... as well.

Delirium · 28-05-2013 08:32AM

JimiTime wrote: »

Unbelievable state of denial there Koth. Abortion is a huge topic in the country at the moment, and a case like this and the statements by Planned Parenthood etc has implications on the whole of the industry. This isn't just some average case, but an absolutely shocking and abhorrant story.

You may "break out the crayons" for me, Jimi, as I honestly have no idea what I'm supposedly denying

JC (reasonably) asked for links to Irish media reports on Gosnell. Some were provided. JC wasn't happy about the length of the articles and I attempted to explain why a story in Ireland would generate more column inches compared to a story from the States.

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

Whatever about now, I would have thought that the point was that the international press as well as US domestic press wasn't initially reporting on it. In response to PopePalpatine's defence of the press coverage, I've previously posted a link to a letter signed by 70 odd congress representatives who were concerned that at least one major news network (CNN or the like) had not adequately covered the story.

On the BBC I counted 7 articles that referenced Kermett Gosnell. This is as opposed to over 60 for Savita Halappanavar. There were approximately 9 on the Guardian, a number of which were found in the "Comment is Free" section, which are opinion pieces and not to be confused with journalism. Now compare this to a word search like "Game of Throwns".

Now this might just be down to location but that wouldn't explain why ABC news took all of 56 days to report on the trial. I think that this post from the excellent getreligion.org sums up a lot of people's opinion on the matter.

From initial readings on the web, it seems that no politicians or media were discussing/reporting on Gosnell before April 2013. That seems to have been on both sides of the media spectrum (conservative and liberal).

I've seen reasons along the lines of "it just made too upset to report on" as an attempt to explain away why they didn't report on the story. That's pretty poor tbh. Reporters are expected to be able to get past the emotional upset that a story causes and do their job.

Other websites have accused the the media of racism and indifference to the murder of children in areas of poverty.

Do you know if ABC released any statement to attempt to explain why they were so remiss in their coverage of the story? Whatever the reason it reflects pretty poorly on them seeing as their competitors would have been covering the story while they didn't.

Delirium · 28-05-2013 08:33AM

J C wrote: »

... so is the Irish media going 'shut up shop' and just run stories about the weather and other items of local interest, like how Mrs O'Flaherties prize duck got killed on the road in Ballygobackwards this morning!!!
Has all of their lofty pretensions really come to this???

No. And I'm not sure how you managed to think I was suggesting that.

Fanny Cradock · 28-05-2013 09:11AM

koth wrote: »

From initial readings on the web, it seems that no politicians or media were discussing/reporting on Gosnell before April 2013. That seems to have been on both sides of the media spectrum (conservative and liberal).

I'm not sure how you would prove a negative. Media sources reported on Gosnell as far back as 2011. Anyway, I wouldn't expect much media interest before the trial actually began and the facts began to emerge.

The charge being made was that certain media sources were not either not covering the story adequately or not covering it at all.

koth wrote: »

I've seen reasons along the lines of "it just made too upset to report on" as an attempt to explain away why they didn't report on the story. That's pretty poor tbh. Reporters are expected to be able to get past the emotional upset that a story causes and do their job.

Other websites have accused the the media of racism and indifference to the murder of children in areas of poverty.

Well, it just goes to show that people say silly things all the time.

koth wrote: »

Do you know if ABC released any statement to attempt to explain why they were so remiss in their coverage of the story? Whatever the reason it reflects pretty poorly on them seeing as their competitors would have been covering the story while they didn't.

In terms of the big networks, charges were levelled at ABC, NBC, CBS and probably others besides. I don't know about other media sources or if any of them made official responses or replied to the letter signed by the 72 congress members.

Delirium · 28-05-2013 09:20AM

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

I'm not sure how you would prove a negative. Media sources reported on Gosnell as far back as 2011. Anyway, I wouldn't expect much media interest before the trial actually began and the facts began to emerge.

The charge being made was that certain media sources were not either not covering the story adequately or not covering it at all.

Well, it just goes to show that people say silly things all the time.

In terms of the big networks, charges were levelled at ABC, NBC, CBS and probably others besides. I don't know about other media sources or if any of them made official responses or replied to the letter signed by the 72 congress members.

Is that not what this tangent is all about, i.e the media weren't reporting on the Gosnell case?

Fanny Cradock · 28-05-2013 09:39AM

You misunderstand me. Perhaps this is my fault.

From initial readings on the web, it seems that no politicians or media were discussing/reporting on Gosnell before April 2013

When you wrote the above you made a statement that would be difficult to falsify. Indeed, the only to do so would be to get every news item, missive, speech and correspondence before the news broke to show us that "no politicians or media were discussing/reporting on Gosnell before April 2013". But I've already stated that the media was reporting on Gosnell as far back as 2011 - you can click on PopePalpatine's links for more on this. Anyway, this was an aside to an aside.

JimiTime · 29-05-2013 01:35PM

koth wrote: »

You may "break out the crayons" for me, Jimi, as I honestly have no idea what I'm supposedly denying

JC (reasonably) asked for links to Irish media reports on Gosnell. Some were provided. JC wasn't happy about the length of the articles and I attempted to explain why a story in Ireland would generate more column inches compared to a story from the States.

You basically argued that it wasn't newsworthy in this country compared to a local story, and thats why it wasn't reported on with any fervour. The denial is that there wasn't a degree of media unease and bias. The details of the story are abhorrant and shocking, and such things are very much reported on with gusto if they happen in the western world, yet weren't in this case. Even though abortion was the topic of the moment, Gosnell case received little attention. This is a story that included children born alive, having their little spines snipped with a scissors to kill them, and the the 'Doctor' keeping their body parts in jars, and apparently laughing in some cases etc. Harold Shipman was spread over every newspaper and news reel. You would have had to have been under a rock not to know who he was or what he did. Gosnell, you have to go digging. Explaining its lack of coverage away as 'Local story was more relevant' etc, is the denial I referred to.

Delirium · 29-05-2013 02:00PM

JimiTime wrote: »

You basically argued that it wasn't newsworthy in this country compared to a local story, and thats why it wasn't reported on with any fervour.
The denial is that there wasn't a degree of media unease and bias.
The details of the story are abhorrant and shocking, and such things are very much reported on with gusto if they happen in the western world, yet weren't in this case. Even though abortion was the topic of the moment, Gosnell case received little attention. This is a story that included children born alive, having their little spines snipped with a scissors to kill them, and the the 'Doctor' keeping their body parts in jars, and apparently laughing in some cases etc. Harold Shipman was spread over every newspaper and news reel. You would have had to have been under a rock not to know who he was or what he did. Gosnell, you have to go digging. Explaining its lack of coverage away as 'Local story was more relevant' etc, is the denial I referred to.

No I didn't. I said that it entirely likely that a story that breaks in Ireland would be easier for Irish papers to fill column inches as sources/events would be happening on their doorstep. I didn't say the Gosnell story wasn't newsworthy.

All newspapers aim the output for their readers. There are papers around the country that focus almost entirely to events within a town/county. National papers would focus on national events and with some stories from abroad.

The story started to get some coverage in most media in the US in April 2013 and there were articles on Irish news-sites shortly after that.

JimiTime · 29-05-2013 03:06PM

koth wrote: »

No I didn't. I said that it entirely likely that a story that breaks in Ireland would be easier for Irish papers to fill column inches as sources/events would be happening on their doorstep. I didn't say the Gosnell story wasn't newsworthy.

All newspapers aim the output for their readers. There are papers around the country that focus almost entirely to events within a town/county. National papers would focus on national events and with some stories from abroad.

The story started to get some coverage in most media in the US in April 2013 and there were articles on Irish news-sites shortly after that.

Again, the issue is not that it didn't get a mention, its that it didn't receive the attention you'd usually get for such a shocking story. You seemed to be suggesting that 'well it was mentioned', and the context of your post to JC regards the local story, seemed to be that it was no big deal that Gosnell was an also ran. My apologies if I misrepresented you. In your opinion, why do you think, that even in the US, it didn't receive the attention that it seems to merit? It seemed to be only after prodding, the media took a bit more of an interest.

Delirium · 29-05-2013 03:44PM

JimiTime wrote: »

Again, the issue is not that it didn't get a mention, its that it didn't receive the attention you'd usually get for such a shocking story. You seemed to be suggesting that 'well it was mentioned', and the context of your post to JC regards the local story, seemed to be that it was no big deal that Gosnell was an also ran. My apologies if I misrepresented you.

No worries, Jimi. I guess I just have a certain idea of how Irish papers run (which could be totally incorrect) and that they are more focused on Irish news stories as it is more likely to be relevant to their readers.

There are many equally horrific stories from around the world that hardly make a ripple in the media here. And there are probably valid reasons why they don't see print/airtime.

In your opinion, why do you think, that even in the US, it didn't receive the attention that it seems to merit? It seemed to be only after prodding, the media took a bit more of an interest.

The subject is too political and both sides of the fence and so everyone kept away to avoid fallout from printing the story, e.g. "you're exploiting murder of children to try and get abortion banned", "look at the dead babies. That's what abortion is!". It also didn't motivate reporters to cover it if their peers in other papers are also not covering it. Not saying those are good reasons for not running the story, just that I could see how they would influence reporters into not following the story.

Zombrex · 31-05-2013 11:18AM

JimiTime wrote: »

Again, the issue is not that it didn't get a mention, its that it didn't receive the attention you'd usually get for such a shocking story. You seemed to be suggesting that 'well it was mentioned', and the context of your post to JC regards the local story, seemed to be that it was no big deal that Gosnell was an also ran. My apologies if I misrepresented you. In your opinion, why do you think, that even in the US, it didn't receive the attention that it seems to merit? It seemed to be only after prodding, the media took a bit more of an interest.

On what grounds are you saying it "merits" more attention than it got? Other than it is great for anti-abortion campaign sabre rattling?

Have you ever heard of Virginia Helena Soares de Souza? I mean before everyone goes off an Googles her name right now?

Fanny Cradock · 31-05-2013 01:08PM

Zombrex wrote: »

On what grounds are you saying it "merits" more attention than it got? Other than it is great for anti-abortion campaign sabre rattling?

Have you ever heard of Virginia Helena Soares de Souza? I mean before everyone goes off an Googles her name right now?

I hadn't. But there are a number of differences between this story and that of Gosnell. Whereas one is a ongoing investigation that has not yet reached the courts, Gosnell was being tried at the time.

The other difference is that criticism was levelled at some parts of the US domestic media for not initially reporting on the trial. This is not the same as foreign media not reporting on a Brazilian news story that is seemingly still in its infancy.

Zombrex · 31-05-2013 01:25PM

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

The other difference is that criticism was levelled at some parts of the US domestic media for not initially reporting on the trial. This is not the same as foreign media not reporting on a Brazilian news story that is seemingly still in its infancy.

No one said they were identical Fanny. The point is that if this doctor in the US was just killing his patients few would have bothered levelling criticism at this not being reported enough (a classic charge when one lacks any real evidence of bias).

The thing that makes this case significant is the anti-abortion sides fever at jumping all over it while complaining that everyone else isn't jumping all over it either.

If you look at what it actually is in context, it doesn't merit the accusations levelled at the media from those trying to associate the public acceptance of abortion with acceptance of infanticide.

Fanny Cradock · 31-05-2013 01:51PM

Zombrex wrote: »

No one said they were identical Fanny. The point is that if this doctor in the US was just killing his patients few would have bothered levelling criticism at this not being reported enough (a classic charge when one lacks any real evidence of bias).

The thing that makes this case significant is the anti-abortion sides fever at jumping all over it while complaining that everyone else isn't jumping all over it either.

If you look at what it actually is in context, it doesn't merit the accusations levelled at the media from those trying to associate the public acceptance of abortion with acceptance of infanticide.

Sorry, but who mentioned anything about the cases being identical? Would you please actually engage with what I wrote, rather than what I didn't.

Do you think it is odd that a major news network took the best part of two months to even mention the trial? Or are you saying that it was of such insignificance to the public that ABC were perfectly justified in not mentioning it?

Also, Gosnell wasn't "just killing his patients" (charming turn of phrase, btw). He was amongst other crimes selectively killing newborn children who by duty of law became his patients. Sometimes he did this by slicing open the backs of their necks. If this trial was about a doctor who only killed toddlers or little Chinese grannies then you bet your bottom dollar people would be interested. And in this regard I would have thought that ABC would have a duty to report the facts.

I'm curious, if Gosnell was killing the born do you think that he was just killing clumps of cells?

Zombrex · 31-05-2013 06:34PM

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

Sorry, but who mentioned anything about the cases being identical? Would you please actually engage with what I wrote, rather than what I didn't.

No one said they were identical, that is the point and why your bizarre listing of superficial differences is irrelevant.

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

Do you think it is odd that a major news network took the best part of two months to even mention the trial? Or are you saying that it was of such insignificance to the public that ABC were perfectly justified in not mentioning it?

Not at all. This was a local murder trial.

It is "significant" to you because you are part of a group attempting to spin this into a case about abortion.

In fact this case only came to national attention when anti-abortion campaigners started using it as description of abortion. Then it became a national issue, though only in a meta kinda way.

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

Also, Gosnell wasn't "just killing his patients" (charming turn of phrase, btw). He was amongst other crimes selectively killing newborn children who by duty of law became his patients. Sometimes he did this by slicing open the backs of their necks. If this trial was about a doctor who only killed toddlers or little Chinese grannies then you bet your bottom dollar people would be interested. And in this regard I would have thought that ABC would have a duty to report the facts.

So it should be reported because it was particularly gruesome murder.

Do you have any idea how many gruesome murders ABC don't report nationally?

Or is this gruesome murder more significant because it fits into a nice narrative for the anti-abortion campaign?

I'm curious, if Gosnell was killing the born do you think that he was just killing clumps of cells?

I don't know what you mean by "if Gosnell was killing the born", but I've already explained my position on abortion many times to you so you really shouldn't have any confusion.

Fanny Cradock · 31-05-2013 08:03PM

Zombrex wrote: »

No one said they were identical, that is the point and why your bizarre listing of superficial differences is irrelevant.

As I understood it, you point was something along the lines of "You haven't heard of this case in Brazil have you? No! So why should Gosnell be any different?".

Now If I misunderstood you I apologise. However, if I am am correct then I fail to see why you think that my response was an irrelevant and bizarre list of superficial differences. It's no good just saying that my points are bizarre and irrelevant. You have to tell me and anyone else reading why you think this is so.

Zombrex wrote: »

Not at all. This was a local murder trial.

I'm not sure what "local murder trial" means. Can you expand on this please?

Zombrex wrote: »

Do you have any idea how many gruesome murders ABC don't report nationally?

No. Do you?

Zombrex wrote: »

Or is this gruesome murder more significant because it fits into a nice narrative for the anti-abortion campaign?

Actually, he was found guilty of murders - plural. I suppose that this was just a typo. I believe that 4 of his staff have also been found guilty.

Unfortunately, this is also not the first time that you have accused people of harvesting bad news for ideological gain. Granted you might be correct in some circumstances but the problem is that you are again doing that thing that you do - negatively generalise about your opposition. It would be nice if you didn't automatically think the worst of your opponents.

Zombrex wrote: »

I don't know what you mean by "if Gosnell was killing the born", but I've already explained my position on abortion many times to you so you really shouldn't have any confusion.

Well this case isn't quite about abortion, is it? Though I do think it highlights the absurdity of being legally entitled to end a human life based if it is inside the womb but prohibited if travels down the birth canal.

I actually still don't understand you position on abortion. For example, I have no idea when you think life becomes sacrosanct or why that is. Indeed, you have previously said, and on more than one occasion, that the unborn is merely a clump of cells. And if memory serves correctly you even mentioned this in relation to a child of 24 - 28 weeks (you can refer to this as a fetus if you wish). So, I'm therefore curious as to what you think Gosnell was killing - both if he did this inside the womb and outside

lmaopml · 01-06-2013 01:21AM

JimiTime wrote: »

Again, the issue is not that it didn't get a mention, its that it didn't receive the attention you'd usually get for such a shocking story. You seemed to be suggesting that 'well it was mentioned', and the context of your post to JC regards the local story, seemed to be that it was no big deal that Gosnell was an also ran. My apologies if I misrepresented you. In your opinion, why do you think, that even in the US, it didn't receive the attention that it seems to merit? It seemed to be only after prodding, the media took a bit more of an interest.

It was a journalist who acted as a normal journalist chasing down the reality of life situations and became the first to highlight them from that perspective - in order to highlight something that would, could and should be newsworthy.

She also encouraged other journalists to do their job too, because reality sells - and be a bit more risque in their endeavors to 'sell' the latest news...real news.

I think that's cool. Free speech, nothing like it!

firemansam4 · 29-06-2013 07:03PM

I don't want this to be another abortion debate thread, if you want to argue the right and wrongs of abortion could you use a different thread.

I was just curious too know how many people who consider themselves Catholics in Ireland would also consider themselves as pro-choice or would vote to allow abortion in a referendum.

Now i'm not just talking about Catholic's who would go to mass every week, but those who would christen there child as a catholic or get married as a catholic. As in my eyes I would still call them people practicing Catholics.

It just seems that numbers don't seem to add up for me as this being still a very high percentage catholic country such a large percentage still would seem to vote for abortion - something like 80% i think. Yet according to Wikipedia (i know not a great source) in 2011 84.2% of the citizens of the Republic of Ireland self-identified as Roman Catholic.

I wonder how many people who participate (not talking about guests who may not be catholic) in ceremony's like a christening or catholic wedding would hold these pro choice views?

In my own personal opinion as a Catholic myself - any one who holds a pro choice belief has absolutely no right participating in any catholic ceremony I think at the very least it is highly hypocritical of them to do so.

Anyway any thoughts on this apreciated.

Abortion debate thread

Comments